This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Just another topic about the homosexuality and the Bible.

#421OrangeWizardPosted 3/19/2014 1:58:54 PM(edited)
See child? I'm not the only one who dismisses you because you contribute absolutely nothing.

Maybe it's time to consider that there's something wrong with your posts.
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards
#422MorgasaurusPosted 3/20/2014 4:58:42 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
What about a lower tier, or a tier on the same level of sin?


I think we both agree that the conscience is a tool that allows us to determine what behavior is sinful. It is also a tool that is subject to being dulled in the case that we continue to ignore it and sin anyway.

Nevertheless, based on my own experience, I do not see how it is possible to live in sin and happiness at the same time. I know I have never been able to.

So nothing you have a solid basis for, in other words.


I think you meant to say everything we are supposed to use to inform our interpretation of Scripture.

I still don't see your basis explaining how disobeying TCoG isn't a sin. It seems to me you just don't like being in a no-win scenario.


The Word of God would never require someone to be a situation where they were required to sin in one way or another. It must therefore be the case that either

(A) Sinning for TCoG is not sinning OR

(B) Disobeying TCoG when they ask you to sin is not sinful.

I choose to believe (B) on the basis of "duh" because if (A) is true then you can get away with anything as long as someone higher up in TCoG gave you orders.

Being imperfect, they probably did. Probably not deliberately, though.
Think of all the people Saul asked to help him kill David.


Oh you mean all the people that went out of their way to completely disregard that order and help save David from Saul? I see how that helps my case considerably.

Was he not the anointed of God? Did he not try to wrongfully kill David?


Yep. He did do that. Also, people under his command and rule refused to comply with his orders and instead tried to save David.

Okay, those are claims. What's behind those claims?

Jesus did it.

OR, your interpretation of that verse is wrong.

Except that it's not.

I don't dispute that. You probably don't sin in your sleep, or if you just sit there, not thinking or doing anything.

I don't think it makes you perfect, or even temporarily perfect, and it certainly does not mean you are reformed.


How does it make sense for Jesus to require perfection from us if perfection is something that we cannot achieve?

Because your conscience, which is supposed to distinguish right from wrong, is inaccurate.

Is it now?

The conscience detects sin. If it detects something that is not a sin, it is inaccurate. If it is inaccurate, then it undermines your argument.

No. Sin is a sufficient but not a necessary condition for guilt. Sin => Guilt. That means Not Guilt => Not Sin.

Other things cause guilt. Therefore, you cannot say that Guilt => Sin. To do that or claim that the conscience is useless on such a basis would be making a converse error.
---
"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? ..."
- Matthew 16:26
#423OrangeWizardPosted 3/20/2014 6:14:34 PM
Morgasaurus posted...

I think we both agree that the conscience is a tool that allows us to determine what behavior is sinful. It is also a tool that is subject to being dulled in the case that we continue to ignore it and sin anyway.

Nevertheless, based on my own experience, I do not see how it is possible to live in sin and happiness at the same time. I know I have never been able to.


Based on your own experience? That's all it is? That's all your argument is based on?


I think you meant to say everything we are supposed to use to inform our interpretation of Scripture.


No, you missed at least one. The one being you need to help of TCoG.


The Word of God would never require someone to be a situation where they were required to sin in one way or another.

And why not?

Oh you mean all the people that went out of their way to completely disregard that order and help save David from Saul? I see how that helps my case considerably.

No, I mean Saul's army that hunted David alongside Saul. 1 Samuel 24:2. Please don't play dumb.


Yep. He did do that.


And did he not gather 3000 to help him on one occasion?
Therefore, did he not order these 3000 to sin?
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards
#424OrangeWizardPosted 3/20/2014 7:00:56 PM(edited)

Jesus did it.


So?


Except that it's not.


I see a claim. I don't see a basis.


How does it make sense for Jesus to require perfection from us if perfection is something that we cannot achieve?


It doesn't.

So therefore,
A) Jesus requires of us something nonsensical, or
B) We be perfect and be without sin, something that we are born with.
C) You're interpreting the verse wrong and Jesus doesn't actually require perfection of us in the sense that you think it to be


Is it now?


If a sin sensor senses stuff that isn't a sin, then it's not a sound sin sensor.


No. Sin is a sufficient but not a necessary condition for guilt. Sin => Guilt. That means Not Guilt => Not Sin.


So how do you determine if it's accurate or not? Since the conscience apparently fails the double-blind test for things that are objectively not sins, how do you know if it's even functioning correctly at all?

How do you know a true sin from something that's a false alarm?
How do you know that the guilt you're feeling comes from sin and not something that isn't a sin?
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards
#425MorgasaurusPosted 3/21/2014 9:11:22 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
Based on your own experience? That's all it is? That's all your argument is based on?


Scripture tells me that everyone has the Law of God written on their hearts. Personal experience tells me that I cannot live in sin without feeling guilt. However, I cannot accurately extrapolate this to other individuals because I cannot possibly know what someone else is truly feeling or thinking.

No, you missed at least one. The one being you need to help of TCoG.


Or maybe, as part of TCoG myself, I should take it upon myself to lead TCoG so that they can better themselves and have a more effective method of dealing with certain members of the congregation. I won't mention them specifically because apparently that pushes your buttons and causes you to say "that's irrelevant" despite that being the whole point of the topic.

No, I mean Saul's army that hunted David alongside Saul. 1 Samuel 24:2. Please don't play dumb.


You mean the people that didn't know any better? So are you telling me it's okay to disobey TCoG as long as you have requisite knowledge that makes it obvious TCoG is full of it for asking you to do something? That's pretty much my main point.

And did he not gather 3000 to help him on one occasion?
Therefore, did he not order these 3000 to sin?


I would say most of the 3000 could not possibly have been aware they were asked to sin. Some were.

So?


Jesus was perfect, and The Scriptures ask us to be perfect as Our Father in Heaven is perfect. Therefore, perfection must be an achievable goal for us where perfection means being free of sin.

I see a claim. I don't see a basis.

My basis is that the verse outright says "You must be perfect." What's your counter-point?

It doesn't.

So therefore,
A) Jesus requires of us something nonsensical, or
B) We be perfect and be without sin, something that we are born with.
C) You're interpreting the verse wrong and Jesus doesn't actually require perfection of us in the sense that you think it to be


Or, you know, by being repentant and improving ourselves over time, we may actually be able to reach a point where we can successfully live without sin.

If a sin sensor senses stuff that isn't a sin, then it's not a sound sin sensor.

So how do you determine if it's accurate or not? Since the conscience apparently fails the double-blind test for things that are objectively not sins, how do you know if it's even functioning correctly at all?


Let's say you are 100% sober, driving home from the theater, and a pedestrian runs out in front of you. You are unable to stop, and tragically you run over the person and they die in the hospital. You will feel guilty about it despite their death being the result of no sinful action on your part. It was simply an accident. See? You can use your brain to separate guilt that comes as a result of sin versus guilt that comes as a result of other matters.

How do you know a true sin from something that's a false alarm?

By thinking.

How do you know that the guilt you're feeling comes from sin and not something that isn't a sin?

By thinking.
---
"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? ..."
- Matthew 16:26
#426OrangeWizardPosted 3/21/2014 9:57:21 PM
Morgasaurus posted...

Scripture tells me that everyone has the Law of God written on their hearts. Personal experience tells me that I cannot live in sin without feeling guilt. However, I cannot accurately extrapolate this to other individuals because I cannot possibly know what someone else is truly feeling or thinking.


So based on your own personal experience then. Why didn't you just say so?


Or maybe, as part of TCoG myself, I should take it upon myself to lead TCoG so that they can better themselves and have a more effective method of dealing with certain members of the congregation. I won't mention them specifically because apparently that pushes your buttons and causes you to say "that's irrelevant" despite that being the whole point of the topic.


Where does the bible say "You need no help from TCoG in understanding the bible, Morg"?


You mean the people that didn't know any better?

1) The bible doesn't say they didn't know any better.
2) Whether or not they knew better is irrelevant. They still followed Saul's orders. Saul was still the anointed of Jehovah. Saul still was acting in the wrong.

Saul still, therefore, ordered them to sin. So this is proof against your assertion that "A hypothetical CoG should be perfect and never ask someone to sin for them", since we have scriptural proof of the CoG doing just that.

Therefore, the CoG shouldn't "lose authority" in your eyes if they ask you to sin, and this doesn't justify yourself proclaiming to be the new leader of the CoG or whatever you're doing.

David could've killed Saul, but he didn't, because he didn't want to sin against God by going against the anointed of Jehovah. 1 Samuel 24:6.


So are you telling me it's okay to disobey TCoG as long as you have requisite knowledge that makes it obvious TCoG is full of it for asking you to do something? That's pretty much my main point.

I don't recall ever telling you anything like that.


I would say most of the 3000 could not possibly have been aware they were asked to sin. Some were.


I didn't ask you "Were most of these 3000 men aware that they had been asked to sin?"
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards
#427OrangeWizardPosted 3/21/2014 10:02:22 PM(edited)

Jesus was perfect, and The Scriptures ask us to be perfect as Our Father in Heaven is perfect. Therefore, perfection must be an achievable goal for us where perfection means being free of sin.


This is your original claim. No need to repeat yourself, I read what you wrote the first time.

Jesus was perfect. What does that matter? How does that strengthen your argument that we can be perfect?

Somewhere else in my reply I argued against the "The Scriptures ask us to be perfect" part. This section of the post is for questioning the relevance of your claim that Jesus was perfect. Leave that other argument out of this section.



My basis is that the verse outright says "You must be perfect." What's your counter-point?



I don't need one because I don't think that you've sufficiently established that your interpretation of the verse is correct. Do that first, then it'll be time for counter-points.


Or, you know, by being repentant and improving ourselves over time, we may actually be able to reach a point where we can successfully live without sin.


Are you just going to present possibilities, or are you going to establish the truth of your interpretation?


Let's say you are 100% sober, driving home from the theater, and a pedestrian runs out in front of you. You are unable to stop, and tragically you run over the person and they die in the hospital. You will feel guilty about it despite their death being the result of no sinful action on your part. It was simply an accident. See? You can use your brain to separate guilt that comes as a result of sin versus guilt that comes as a result of other matters.


All you did was say
"You did X.
X was not a sin.
You feel guilty
See?"

This doesn't prove anything. This doesn't prove how one can separate guilt from sin and guilt from non-sin.

Sure, if you're omniscient, as you are being the narrator of this hypothetical, you can separate it out pretty easily. But what of those who aren't omniscient?


By thinking.


What of those who thought about their homosexuality and came to the opposite conclusion that you did? Are they wrong? Did they not think enough? How do you know you aren't the one who's wrong? If you say "Because I did X", who's to say they did not also do X?
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards
#428childofdelightPosted 3/22/2014 2:56:24 AM
Proverbs 2 & 14

Romans 12:1-2
I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

---
//I`*'\;:;:;/'*`*`{ ~ Love and Light ~ }`*`*'\;:;:;/'*`I\Y/I`'*|~P L~\*'`'I\\
|]I'*'`|:/\:|`'*'u*'`{ ~ Blessed Be ~ }`'*n'*'`|:/\:|`'*'I[ | ]I`'*|~U R~\*'`'I[|
#429MorgasaurusPosted 3/24/2014 8:21:56 AM
OrangeWizard posted...
So based on your own personal experience then. Why didn't you just say so?


I did say so before.

Where does the bible say "You need no help from TCoG in understanding the bible, Morg"?


I've consulted a great many websites (some of which I linked here) hosted by Churches and Christian scholars over the last few months in the process of coming to where I am now. My initial change of viewpoint may have initially been in opposition to traditionalists, but my understanding of The Scriptures have been informed by TCoG.

1) The bible doesn't say they didn't know any better.
2) Whether or not they knew better is irrelevant. They still followed Saul's orders. Saul was still the anointed of Jehovah. Saul still was acting in the wrong.


Everyone who had personal knowledge of Saul and David's drama chose to save David. Everyone who didn't followed Saul's orders.

Saul still, therefore, ordered them to sin. So this is proof against your assertion that "A hypothetical CoG should be perfect and never ask someone to sin for them", since we have scriptural proof of the CoG doing just that.

Therefore, the CoG shouldn't "lose authority" in your eyes if they ask you to sin, and this doesn't justify yourself proclaiming to be the new leader of the CoG or whatever you're doing.


The "or whatever you're doing" includes pointing out the weakness that traditional Churches have in dealing with certain members of their congregations. I'm not declaring myself a new leader of anything.

And how is this going against my assertion? Saul ordered people to kill David, and the people that knew better chose not to follow the order. They directly opposed Saul.

I don't recall ever telling you anything like that.


Except that you cited a story from The Scriptures where all of the individuals involved that had requisite knowledge of the matter opposed Saul and didn't simply submit to his orders.

I didn't ask you "Were most of these 3000 men aware that they had been asked to sin?"

I don't care what you did and didn't ask. You don't get to think for me OrangeWizard. I'll discuss things you bring up any way I please.

Jesus was perfect. What does that matter? How does that strengthen your argument that we can be perfect?

Because the life of Jesus is an example of a perfect human life. Wouldn't the claim that there exist no perfect humans be similar to something you said to me earlier about black swans? The bottom line is that this, again, is something that we are not going to agree on. The Scriptures demand perfection of us, so I choose to believe its possible. You, on the other hand, do not believe The Scriptures require perfection of us. We aren't going to agree.

I don't need one because I don't think that you've sufficiently established that your interpretation of the verse is correct. Do that first, then it'll be time for counter-points.

Well then we have nothing to discuss. The verse clearly demands perfection of us.

This doesn't prove anything. This doesn't prove how one can separate guilt from sin and guilt from non-sin.

I didn't say it was easy.

What of those who thought about their homosexuality and came to the opposite conclusion that you did? Are they wrong? Did they not think enough? How do you know you aren't the one who's wrong? If you say "Because I did X", who's to say they did not also do X?

They're probably just basing their viewpoint on English translations of Scripture.
---
"For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? ..."
- Matthew 16:26
#430OrangeWizardPosted 3/24/2014 11:42:43 AM
So you're not going to even try to back up your interpretation that we can be perfect? You're just going with the "It's obvious!" defense?
---
The head is backwards.
The head is backwards